The hypothesis of an antieconomy developed in part 1 is incommensurate with mainstream economics. This article explores three reasons for this situation: the limits of discipline-based scholarship in general and of mainstream economics in particular, the status of economists in contemporary societies, and the failure of economists to accept any responsibility for the consequences flowing from the application of their theories. Politicians are unable to resist their economic advisors who speak in the name of science, with the result that the democratic process in relation to economic issues is essentially paralyzed.
Cassidy, J. (2008). Economics: Which way for Obama? The New York Review of Books, 55(10), 30-34.
2.
Daly, H. (1996). Beyond growth: The economics of sustainable development . Boston: Beacon.
3.
Ellul, J. (1964). The technological society. New York: Knopf.
4.
Ellul, J. (1967). The political illusion. New York: Knopf.
5.
Ellul, J. (1975). The new demons. New York: Seabury.
6.
Galbraith, J.K. (1967). The new industrial state. New York: New American Library.
7.
Leontieff, W. (1982, July 9). Letters: Academic economics. Science, 217, 104-105.
8.
McQuaig, L. (1998). The cult of impotence: Selling the myth of powerlessness in the global economy. New York: Penguin.
9.
Polanyi, K. (2001). The great transformation: The political and economic origins of our time. Boston: Beacon .
10.
Richta, R. (1969). Civilization at the crossroads: Social and human implications of the scientific and technological revolution. Prague, Czech Republic: International Arts and Sciences Press.
11.
Vanderburg, W.H. (1985). The growth of minds and cultures: A unified theory of the structure of human experience. Toronto, Ontario , Canada: University of Toronto Press.
12.
Vanderburg, W.H. (2000) The labyrinth of technology. Toronto, Ontario, Canada: University of Toronto Press .
13.
Vanderburg, W.H. (2005). Living in the labyrinth of technology. Toronto, Ontario, Canada: University of Toronto Press .
14.
Vanderburg, W.H. (2006a). Can the university escape from the labyrinth of technology? Part 1: Rethinking the intellectual and professional division of labor and its knowledge infrastructure. Bulletin of Science, Technology & Society, 26, 171-177.
15.
Vanderburg, W.H. (2006b). Can the university escape from the labyrinth of technology? Part 2: Intellectual map making and the tension between breadth and depth. Bulletin of Science, Technology & Society, 26, 178-188.
16.
Vanderburg, W.H. (2006c). Can the university escape from the labyrinth of technology? Part 3: A strategy for transforming the profession. Bulletin of Science, Technology & Society, 26, 189-203.
17.
Vanderburg, W.H. (2006d). Can the university escape from the labyrinth of technology? Part 4: Extending the strategy to medicine, the social sciences, and the university. Bulletin of Science, Technology & Society, 26, 204-216.
18.
Vanderburg, W.H. (2008). The antimoney and antieconomy hypothesis: From wealth production to wealth extraction (part 1). The Bulletin of Science, Technology & Society, 29, 48-56.
19.
Wittgenstein, L. (1953). Philosophical investigations (G. E. M. Anscombe , Trans.). New York: Macmillan.
